DOCSLIB.ORG

Rethought Forms: How Do They Work? 25

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Rethought Forms: How Do They Work? 25 ARCTOS ACTA PHILOLOGICA FENNICA VOL. XLVIII HELSINKI 2014 INDEX NEIL ADKIN Some Recent "Improvements" to the Text of Jerome's 11 Letter 52, "On Sacerdotal Lifestyle" Neci̇p Fi̇kri̇ Ali̇cAN Rethought Forms: How Do They Work? 25 luigi ArAtA Usi medici dell'Anagyris foetida nella medicina greca 57 christer BruuN True Patriots? The Public Activities of the *Augustales 67 of Roman Ostia and the summa honoraria giuseppe cAmodecA Un nuovo consularis Byzacenae di tardo IV secolo e i 93 Tannonii di Puteoli ANtoNio corso Retrieving the Style of Cephisodotus the Younger 109 lee FrAtANtuoNo Saevit medio in certamine: Mars in the Aeneid 137 seppo heikkiNeN Copy-paste Metrics? Lupus of Ferrières on Boethius 165 PANU HYPPÖNEN 4π = 12.5? – The Problems in the Vitruvian Hodometer 185 mikA kAjAvA Two Greek Documents on Bronze (IG XIV 954; IG XIV 205 955 = IGUR 4) tuA korhoNeN Some Steps Towards Plato's Ecopolitics in the Laws 211 ANtti lAmpiNeN Fragments from the 'Middle Ground' – Posidonius' 229 Northern Ethnography jAri pAkkANeN A Reappraisal of the First Publication of Stirrup 261 Jar Inscriptions from Tiryns by Johannes Sundwall: Photographs, Lost Sherds and the 'a-nu-to/no-di-zo Workshop' giorgos c. pArAskeviotis Verg. ecl. 6,13–30. Mimic Humour in Silenus' Scene 279 ELINA PYY In Search of Peer Support: Changing Perspectives on 295 Sisterhood in Roman Imperial Epic olli sAlomies Some Published, But Not Very Well Known Latin 319 Inscriptions heikki soliN Analecta epigraphica CCXCII– CCCI 347 pietro verziNA L'esordio ἦν ὅτε (Cypria fr. 1,1 Bernabé) e le sue 415 connotazioni narrative ville vuolANto Children in the Roman World: Cultural and Social 435 Perspectives. A Review Article De novis libris iudicia 451 Index librorum in hoc volumine recensorum 575 Libri nobis missi 581 Index scriptorum 587 Arctos 48 (2014) 25–55 RETHOUGHT FORMS: HOW DO THEY WORK? NECİP Fİkrİ ALİCAN Abstract This paper is a critical evaluation of Holger Thesleff's thinking on Plato's Forms, especially of his 'rethinking' of the matter, as he puts it in the title of his most recent contribution.1 It lays out a broadly sympathetic perspective through dia- lectical engagement with the main lines of his interpretation and reconstruction of Plato's world. The aim is to launch the formal academic reception of that re- construction (rethinking), which Thesleff cautiously and modestly presents as a 'proposal' — his teaser to elicit a reaction, positive or negative. The exegetical focus is on tracing the inspiration and reasoning behind his 'two-level' model of Plato's ontology, which, in turn, supports his tripartite classification of Forms. The critical focus is on identifying potential areas of misunderstanding and sup- plying any explanations, analyses, or arguments that may enhance the clarity of the respective positions. 1. Introduction Thesleff is difficult to ignore and easy to misunderstand. He has something to say about practically everything we are accustomed to discussing in regard to Plato and a few things we are not. He also has a proclivity for going against the grain 1 The 'rethinking' in question is actually a product of collaboration between Thesleff and myself: Alican and Thesleff 2013. Thesleff's insight, however, predates our formal collaboration, making it both appropriate and convenient to abbreviate repeated references to our article as 'Thesleff 2013'. Thesleff's personal initiative unfolds through several of his earlier works: 1989; 1993; 1999 (= 2009, 383–506). My own efforts intersect with that initiative in two places: Alican 2012 (87–110, 110–29) and Alican 2015. 26 Necip Fikri Alican of mainstream interpretation. This is why I have taken to calling him a maverick, both in person and in print (Alican 2012, 185–88). He has yet to correct me on that. His outlook on the Forms alone reveals why he has not voiced an objection: He is a maverick, and he is comfortable with that label. One would have to be to produce and promote the ideas he does. Thesleff's positions are always fluid, his work, always in progress. What we get in his books and articles are snapshots of an ever developing viewpoint. To some extent, this is true of all academic work. But with Thesleff, it might well be the common denominator of his intellectual output. This makes it all the more difficult, and that much more important, to keep up with his investigation of any given subject. My aim here is to explicate his unorthodox approach to Plato's on- tology, with particular emphasis on what he does with the Forms. 2. The General Enterprise The most striking feature of the general enterprise is its ontological elitism. Thesleff does not recognise every abstraction in Plato as a Form.2 Nor does he take what we normally regard as Platonic Forms to be, one and all, the same kind of thing: each one simply a Form, just like any other. He sees a fundamental dif- ference between, say, the Form for bed and that for motion, and further, between either one of those and the Form for justice — examples likely to be familiar even without specific references. He proposes rethinking Plato's Forms with a view to preserving the variegation present in the original as opposed to perpetuating the uniformity prevailing in the literature. His rethinking inspires a tripartite classification consisting of Ideal Forms, Conceptual Forms, and Relational Forms. This arrangement comes with caveats reflecting uncertainties in the dialogues themselves. The following provisions in particular are important for a thorough appreciation: 2 The first letter of 'Form' (or 'Idea') is capitalised whenever the reference is to Plato's Forms. Individual Forms take on an initial capital when this would help avoid ambiguity (but not otherwise), as in the case of a direct comparison between a Form and an instantiation bearing the same name, for example, Justice itself and justice in the court (or the Just itself and a just law). Rethought Forms: How Do They Work? 27 • The classification is a thought experiment, as is Plato's own approach to philosophy.3 There can be no proof in the standard sense. • The taxonomy has little to do with chronology: To affirm differences be- tween types of Forms is not to affirm developmentalism.4 • The three divisions are decidedly different from one another, so much so as to defy being brought together under the general rubric of Forms, a label retained for convenience and familiarity. • Despite fundamental differences, one kind of Form can, depending on context, take on the characteristics of another, specifically with certain Conceptual Forms and Relational Forms coming to resemble Ideal Forms. We may add to these what would be the most important condition of all, though not directly about the Forms: the understanding of Plato's philosophical vision in terms of a sliding scale of reality represented by the metaphor of two levels in one world. This is Thesleff's alternative to the traditional two-world interpretation where Forms reside in one world and particulars in another. The caveat here is that the focal point of Plato's metaphysics is not the relationship between Forms and particulars, nor the diversification experiments with Forms, but the stratifica- tion of reality in a hierarchical ontological structure consisting of a higher and lower level and untold layers in between. Forms and particulars, not to mention the different kinds of Forms, are distinguished through this two-level vision — not merely a heuristic tool for understanding Plato but an outlook actually present in Plato. This means, among other things, that Thesleff's classification of Forms is an initiative to tidy up the most important features of Plato's ontology rather than an attempt to provide an exhaustive catalogue of Forms recognised in the scholarly tradition. But even after we make allowances for any and all caveats, Thesleff's account leaves us with questions that can fruitfully be pursued further and problems that cannot fairly be placed entirely on Plato's doorstep: 3 Thesleff uses the model to make better sense of Plato, who was in the habit of using his own models, among them, the Forms, to make better sense of the world. 4 See Thesleff (2013, 20, cf. 14, 16, 24, 33, including nn. 4, 10). Admittedly, Plato may have come up with the different types of Forms as a result of different thought experiments conducted at different times. But the resulting variety functions as an organic whole rather than a succession of increasingly better models of exactly the same thing. One category of Forms is not an improved version of another. For more on his views on chronology, see Thesleff (1982 [= 2009, 143–382]; 1989, 1–26). 28 Necip Fikri Alican • What is the difference between Forms and concepts? • What is the difference between Forms and universals? • What is the ontological status of Forms, or, to elaborate, what is the mode of their existence, or the nature and implications of their reality? • How does the ontological status of Ideal Forms differ from that of Con- ceptual Forms and Relational Forms? The first three questions cannot be answered without expanding on them to dis- tinguish between the kinds of Forms envisaged. And this is what gives rise to the fourth question. To be fair, Thesleff answers all these questions. But his answers can leave the reader wondering, for example, what the difference is between horseness and justice, the former, presumably a Conceptual Form, the latter, defi- nitely an Ideal Form. Horseness lacks the positive intrinsic value characteristic of (common and unique to) Ideal Forms and therefore present in justice. But apart from that, both horseness and justice are universals that exist in reality and out- side the mind, thus pointing to a shared ontological platform.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Poverty of Socratic Questioning: Asking and Answering in the Meno
    University of Cincinnati University of Cincinnati College of Law Scholarship and Publications Faculty Articles and Other Publications College of Law Faculty Scholarship 1994 The oP verty of Socratic Questioning: Asking and Answering In The eM no Thomas D. Eisele University of Cincinnati College of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.uc.edu/fac_pubs Part of the Legal Education Commons Recommended Citation Eisele, Thomas D., "The oP verty of Socratic Questioning: Asking and Answering In The eM no" (1994). Faculty Articles and Other Publications. Paper 36. http://scholarship.law.uc.edu/fac_pubs/36 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Law Faculty Scholarship at University of Cincinnati College of Law Scholarship and Publications. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Articles and Other Publications by an authorized administrator of University of Cincinnati College of Law Scholarship and Publications. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE POVERTY OF SOCRATIC QUESTIONING: ASKING AND ANSWERING IN THE MEND Thomas D. Eisele* I understand [philosophy 1 as a willingness to think not about some­ thing other than what ordinary human beings think about, but rather to learn to think undistractedly about things that ordinary human beings cannot help thinking about, or anyway cannot help having occur to them, sometimes in fantasy, sometimes asa flash across a landscape; such things, for example, as whether we can know the world as it is in itself, or whether others really know the nature of one's own experiences, or whether good and bad are relative, or whether we might not now be dreaming that we are awake, or whether modern tyrannies and weapons and spaces and speeds and art are continuous with the past of the human race or discontinuous, and hence whether the learning of the human race is not irrelevant to the problems it has brought before itself.
    [Show full text]
  • The Roles of Solon in Plato's Dialogues
    The Roles of Solon in Plato’s Dialogues Dissertation Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Samuel Ortencio Flores, M.A. Graduate Program in Greek and Latin The Ohio State University 2013 Dissertation Committee: Bruce Heiden, Advisor Anthony Kaldellis Richard Fletcher Greg Anderson Copyrighy by Samuel Ortencio Flores 2013 Abstract This dissertation is a study of Plato’s use and adaptation of an earlier model and tradition of wisdom based on the thought and legacy of the sixth-century archon, legislator, and poet Solon. Solon is cited and/or quoted thirty-four times in Plato’s dialogues, and alluded to many more times. My study shows that these references and allusions have deeper meaning when contextualized within the reception of Solon in the classical period. For Plato, Solon is a rhetorically powerful figure in advancing the relatively new practice of philosophy in Athens. While Solon himself did not adequately establish justice in the city, his legacy provided a model upon which Platonic philosophy could improve. Chapter One surveys the passing references to Solon in the dialogues as an introduction to my chapters on the dialogues in which Solon is a very prominent figure, Timaeus- Critias, Republic, and Laws. Chapter Two examines Critias’ use of his ancestor Solon to establish his own philosophic credentials. Chapter Three suggests that Socrates re- appropriates the aims and themes of Solon’s political poetry for Socratic philosophy. Chapter Four suggests that Solon provides a legislative model which Plato reconstructs in the Laws for the philosopher to supplant the role of legislator in Greek thought.
    [Show full text]
  • Beauty As a Transcendental in the Thought of Joseph Ratzinger
    The University of Notre Dame Australia ResearchOnline@ND Theses 2015 Beauty as a transcendental in the thought of Joseph Ratzinger John Jang University of Notre Dame Australia Follow this and additional works at: https://researchonline.nd.edu.au/theses Part of the Philosophy Commons COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Copyright Regulations 1969 WARNING The material in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act. Any further copying or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection under the Act. Do not remove this notice. Publication Details Jang, J. (2015). Beauty as a transcendental in the thought of Joseph Ratzinger (Master of Philosophy (School of Philosophy and Theology)). University of Notre Dame Australia. https://researchonline.nd.edu.au/theses/112 This dissertation/thesis is brought to you by ResearchOnline@ND. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses by an authorized administrator of ResearchOnline@ND. For more information, please contact [email protected]. School of Philosophy and Theology Sydney Beauty as a Transcendental in the Thought of Joseph Ratzinger Submitted by John Jang A thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Master of Philosophy Supervised by Dr. Renée Köhler-Ryan July 2015 © John Jang 2015 Table of Contents Abstract v Declaration of Authorship vi Acknowledgements vii Introduction 1 Structure 3 Method 5 PART I - Metaphysical Beauty 7 1.1.1 The Integration of Philosophy and Theology 8 1.1.2 Ratzinger’s Response 11 1.2.1 Transcendental Participation 14 1.2.2 Transcendental Convertibility 18 1.2.3 Analogy of Being 25 PART II - Reason and Experience 28 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Neoplatonism: the Last Ten Years
    The International Journal The International Journal of the of the Platonic Tradition 9 (2015) 205-220 Platonic Tradition brill.com/jpt Critical Notice ∵ Neoplatonism: The Last Ten Years The past decade or so has been an exciting time for scholarship on Neo­ platonism. I ought to know, because during my stint as the author of the “Book Notes” on Neoplatonism for the journal Phronesis, I read most of what was published in the field during this time. Having just handed the Book Notes over to George Boys­Stones, I thought it might be worthwhile to set down my overall impressions of the state of research into Neoplatonism. I cannot claim to have read all the books published on this topic in the last ten years, and I am here going to talk about certain themes and developments in the field rather than trying to list everything that has appeared. So if you are an admirer, or indeed author, of a book that goes unmentioned, please do not be affronted by this silence—it does not necessarily imply a negative judgment on my part. I hope that the survey will nonetheless be wide­ranging and comprehensive enough to be useful. I’ll start with an observation made by Richard Goulet,1 which I have been repeating to students ever since I read it. Goulet conducted a statistical analy­ sis of the philosophical literature preserved in the original Greek, and discov­ ered that almost three­quarters of it (71%) was written by Neoplatonists and commentators on Aristotle. In a sense this should come as no surprise.
    [Show full text]
  • The Central Myth of Plato's Phaedrus Anne Lebeck
    The Central Myth of Plato's "Phaedrus" Lebeck, Anne Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Fall 1972; 13, 3; ProQuest pg. 267 The Central Myth of Plato's Phaedrus Anne Lebeck SHALL ATTEMPT to analyze the myth of Phaedrus (246A3-256E2) as if I it were poetry, more specifically, as if it were a choral lyric in a tragedy. Such an analysis will consist in examining the language and structure of the myth itself and thereafter exploring its connec­ tions with other parts of the dialogue. There are several reasons for choosing this approach and claiming for it philosophic no less than literary validity. First, Plato employs two modes of discourse: the dia­ lectic and the mythopoeic or imagistic. His 'philosophy' as emergent from most of the dialogues comprises an interaction of the two.l Second, the myths and imagery of Plato have the quality and impact of great poetry.2 Like poetry, theirs is "language charged with mean­ ing to the utmost possible degree." Phaedrus especially calls for attention on this level. It teems with myths and mythic allusions, poetic tags and poetic allusions. Despite this, and despite the lip service paid to the importance of style and structure in Plato's work, the many treatments of Phaedrus have been either commentaries or inquiries into various problems raised by the dialogue.3 Neither reveal how in language and in form the dialogue so perfectly is what it discusses, exemplifies what it advocates, awak­ ens the reactions which it describes. 1 For a perceptive treatment of this interaction, see Aloys de Marignac, Imagination et dialectique (Paris 1951) 9-30.
    [Show full text]
  • Teaching Versus Anamnēsis in the Philosophy Of
    Loyola University Chicago Loyola eCommons Dissertations Theses and Dissertations 1994 The Word of the Other: Teaching Versus Anamnesis̄ in the Philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas Norman Wirzba Loyola University Chicago Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_diss Part of the Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Wirzba, Norman, "The Word of the Other: Teaching Versus Anamnesis̄ in the Philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas" (1994). Dissertations. 3449. https://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_diss/3449 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. Copyright © 1994 Norman Wirzba Norman Wirzba Loyola University of Chicago THE WORD OF THE OTHER: TEACHING VERSUS ANAMNESIS IN THE PHILOSOPHY OF EMMANUEL LEVINAS Socratic philosophy represents a long-standing tradition within philosophy that understands the journey to truth in terms of the traveler's innate capacity. Anamnesis, maieutics, and elenchus each confirm that truth is not utterly foreign but is instead always within my possession or grasp. Other people, to the extent that they participate in my philosophical exploration, serve only to enable my capabilities or potential. They are not teachers to me. Nor would I need them, since I am always already in the neighborhood of truth. Emmanuel Levinas's description of the "face to face" encounter between people challenges the adequacy of this model. Another person is not simply a midwife who leads me to a recovery of truth that was always within me or within my domain.
    [Show full text]
  • Oh, Phaedrus, If I Don't Know My Phaedrus I
    Bard College Bard Digital Commons Senior Projects Spring 2018 Bard Undergraduate Senior Projects Spring 2018 “Oh, Phaedrus, if I don’t know my Phaedrus I must be forgetting who I am myself”: Glimpses of Self in Divine Erotic Madness Jared de Uriarte Bard College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.bard.edu/senproj_s2018 Part of the Ancient History, Greek and Roman through Late Antiquity Commons, Ancient Philosophy Commons, Epistemology Commons, Metaphysics Commons, Philosophy of Language Commons, and the Philosophy of Mind Commons This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License. Recommended Citation de Uriarte, Jared, "“Oh, Phaedrus, if I don’t know my Phaedrus I must be forgetting who I am myself”: Glimpses of Self in Divine Erotic Madness" (2018). Senior Projects Spring 2018. 225. https://digitalcommons.bard.edu/senproj_s2018/225 This Open Access work is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been provided to you by Bard College's Stevenson Library with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this work in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights- holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/or on the work itself. For more information, please contact [email protected]. “Oh, Phaedrus, if I don’t know my Phaedrus I must be forgetting who I am myself”: Glimpses of Self in Divine Erotic Madness Senior Project Submitted to The Division of Social Studies of Bard College by Jared Rappa de Uriarte Annandale-on-Hudson, New York May 2018 To Greg, For all the favors that made this project possible.
    [Show full text]
  • Plato's Phaedo Phil 310 – Syllabus
    Plato’s Phaedo phil 310 – Syllabus Instructor: Willie Costello Winter Quarter. Meetings on Wednesdays from 15:00 to 17:50 in Bldg 20Rm21g. Office hours on Tuesdays from 13:30 to 15:00 in Bldg 100 Rm 102m, or by appointment (email [email protected]). Course readings available from http://bit.ly/phaedobox. Course description This course is dedicated to a slow and close reading ofthe Phaedo. This dialogue, undoubtedly one of the greatest in Plato’s oeuvre, showcases the full range of his philosophical thought, touching on issues in ethics, epistemology, metaphysics, physics (or natural philosophy), psychology (in the literal sense of the word), philosophical methodology, and even the philosophy of language. The dialogue is also a literary masterpiece, featuring discussants with genuine personalities, a substantial frame dialogue which keeps reappearing throughout the work, various religious and cultic overtones, an evocative closing myth, and a final scene of as much pathos as any in Greek drama. On top of all this, the Phaedo is arguably the most “Platonic” of the dialogues; nowhere else in the corpus do we find as clear a statement of the theory of Forms and the immortality of the soul – the “twin pillars” of Platonism, as F. M. Cornford once called them. And yet, for all this, the Phaedo remains a perplexing work. For one thing, its arguments for the soul’s immortality are all generally thought to be failures; even some of the dialogue’s own participants remain not entirely convinced at the end. The basic conception of the soul on which it tacitly relies (viz., the conception of the soul as a simple particular substance) is not generally thought to be credible, either, and does not sit well with Plato’s tripartite analysis of the soul elsewhere (not to mention Aristotle’s subsequent hylomorphic analysis).
    [Show full text]
  • What Eros and Anamnesis Can Tell Us About Knowledge of Virtue in Plato's Protagoras, Symposium, and Meno Rebecca Vendetti Supe
    What Eros and Anamnesis Can Tell us about Knowledge of Virtue in Plato’s Protagoras, Symposium, and Meno Rebecca Vendetti Supervisor: Francisco Gonzalez Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the MA degree in philosophy Department of Philosophy Faculty of Arts University of Ottawa © Rebecca Vendetti, Ottawa, Canada, 2012 I ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This research was partially funded by the Federal Government of Canada in the form of a SSHRC Master’s scholarship, and the University of Ottawa in the form of an excellence and an admission scholarship. I would also like to thank my thesis supervisor for providing me with numerous valuable textual resources as well as the inspiration for this project. II ABSTRACT The goal of this thesis is ultimately to answer the two questions raised and left unresolved in Plato’s Protagoras: What is virtue? Is virtue teachable? Following the dramatic order of Plato’s dialogues as outlined by Catherine Zuckert, I intend to show that the Meno returns to the issues raised and left unresolved in the Protagoras, but now with the idea of recollection. My intention is to look at how the idea of recollection, developed and associated with eros in the intervening dialogues, can help explain the nature of virtue and its teachability. I believe that we can come to answer both questions, “What is virtue?” and “Is virtue teachable?” posed in the Protagoras and the Meno by drawing on the ideas of anamnesis and eros as they appear in the Meno, Phaedrus, and Symposium. III TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction……………………………………………………………………1 I.
    [Show full text]
  • Notes on God's Transcendental Properties 1.Pdf
    The “Infinity” of the Transcendental Properties of God The “properties” of God, the so-called transcendental properties, which traditionally include being, goodness and truth, as well as others like beauty, are paradigm examples of properties that are not “measurable.” They are not properties that are amenable to extensive measure as that idea is understood in modern science (see notes on extensive measure). That is, they are not properties for which it is possible to define an experimental unit and an experimental operation of “adding” one unit to another (called concatenation in measure theory). The best that is available for “quantities” of masses like being, goodness, truth, and beauty is that they may be put in to an ordering of more to less without exact numerical evaluation. It follows that it is not possible to apply the modern mathematical notion of “the infinite” to such “quantities” because the modern notion presupposes that it is possible to count – apply numbers to – the quantities that are being measured. It also follows that the only sense in which the properties of God would be infinite in a sense that is appropriate to a non-numerical ordering. In God’s being, truth, goodness, etc. are infinite only in the sense that the quantity of the properties that God possesses is the greatest possible. Below are internet texts explaining the transcendental properties. See also Thomas Aquinas, De Veritate, Q1, Articles 1‐3 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcendentals Transcendentals From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search This article is about the transcendental properties of being, for other articles about transcendence; see Transcendence (disambiguation).
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings Ofthe Danish Institute at Athens IV
    Proceedings ofthe Danish Institute at Athens IV Edited by Jonas Eiring and Jorgen Mejer © Copyright The Danish Institute at Athens, Athens 2004 The publication was sponsored by: The Danish Research Council for the Humanities Generalkonsul Gosta Enboms Fond. Proceedings of the Danish Institute at Athens General Editors: Jonas Eiring and Jorgen Mejer. Graphic design and production: George Geroulias, Press Line. Printed in Greece on permanent paper. ISBN: 87 7288 724 9 Distributed by: AARHUS UNIVERSITY PRESS Langelandsgade 177 DK-8200 Arhus N Fax (+45) 8942 5380 73 Lime Walk Headington, Oxford 0X3 7AD Fax (+44) 865 750 079 Box 511 Oakvill, Conn. 06779 Fax (+1)203 945 94 9468 Cover illustration: Finds from the Hellenistic grave at Chalkis, Aetolia. Photograph by Henrik Frost. The Platonic Corpus in Antiquity Jorgen Mejer Plato is the one and only philosopher particular edition which has determined from Antiquity whose writings have not only the Medieval tradition but also been preserved in their entirety. And our modern knowledge of Platonic dia not only have they been preserved, they logues, goes back to the Roman have been transmitted as a single col Emperor Tiberius' court-astrologer, lection of texts. Our Medieval manu Thrasyllus.2 Tarrant demonstrates rather scripts seem to go back to one particu convincingly that there is little basis for lar edition, an archetypus in two vol assuming that the tetralogical arrange umes, as appears from the subscript to ment existed before Thrasyllus, that it is the dialogue Menexenus, which is the possible to identify a philosophical posi last dialogue in the seventh tetralogy: tion which explains the tetralogies, that T8>iog toD JtQcbxou 6i6)dou.
    [Show full text]
  • Notes on Plato's Phaedo
    Sean Hannan The Examined Life Autumn 2015 Notes on Plato’s Phaedo 1. Background a. The Phaedo tells the story of Socrates’ final days. Taking place after the events depicted in the Euthyphro, Apology, and Crito, this dialogue serves as his swansong. b. Whereas the Apology had a fairly straightforward structure, consisting mainly of Socrates’ monologues to the citizens of Athens (with a bit of back-and-forth with Meletus thrown in), the Phaedo is a full-blown dialogue. In fact, it operates as a dialogue on multiple levels. First we have the framing dialogue, which consists of the eponymous main character Phaedo’s account of Socrates’ final words, which he gives to Echecrates and others on his way home from Athens. Then we have the dialogue recounted by Phaedo, which takes place between Socrates and those who were with him in his final hours. c. First, let’s take a closer look at the framing dialogue. Phaedo (the character) is on his way back from Athens after attending the trial and execution of Socrates. As he approaches his hometown of Elis in the Peloponnese, he runs into a group of Pythagoreans, the most vocal of which is Echecrates. These men are dubbed ‘Pythagoreans’ because they follow the teachings of Pythagoras. While most of us are familiar with his theorem, Pythagoras had much more to say on the topics of philosophy and mathematics. For our purposes here, we should only note these Pythagoreans would’ve been especially open to the mathematical examples Phaedo tells them Socrates made use of in his final conversation—e.g., the difference between odd and even numbers, etc.
    [Show full text]